![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So many people going on about voting doesn't help and this is all the Democrats' fault. And.. voting is not sufficent, no; it is also necessary to get involved in other ways, whether that's going out to protest or sending money to an activism organization.
But otherwise we're back to what I've said before: if you don't vote, and they do, all you get is the other side voting and the other side in power. And our system is a lot of checks and balances; Democrats having a marginal majority does not mean they can magically do whatever they want. People saying "Biden should just issue an executive order dissolving the Supreme Court" are... fuzzy... on how the government actually works. Democrats aren't perfect but they're better than the Republicans, and for all the "both sides!" stuff (which is not any better a look on leftists than "neutrals," by the way), Democrats would not have done this, and they wouldn't have permitted it if they'd been in a position to stop it.
It's easier to burn something down than build something up. All the Republicans have to do is cause chaos. They need many fewer seats to do that, and they've been good at not having internecine warfare long enough to get just enough people to cause chaos. Democrats need a lot more of the government to do anything useful, because they need to build things up. I saw someone say that Biden should have packed the court and respond to being asked "how?" with "I DON'T CARE HOW." Which tells me a couple of things-- you're okay with living in a dictatorship as long as it's your dictatorship, and that you have absolutely no idea how government works.
"We're not donating to Democrats until legislation happens" is also another way to ensure legislation never happens, by the by. If they have no money to campaign then the Republicans get elected.
Going on about overthrowing the government is fun (if you're a certain type of person), but your revolution isn't a revolution until it's got a budget, a date, and actionable steps attached to it. Now, I think violent revolution is a bad idea-- there are specific historical reasons the American Revolution resulted in a functioning government that don't apply to most violent revolutions; we really need to teach the actual history of the French Revolution past the storming of the Bastille-- but if you're not going out and planning out exactly how you're going to do it, you're not doing anything useful, and you are doing active harm by promoting fatalism and convincing people there's no point in activism because they're not doing violent revolution. (And most people? Are not down with violent revolution.)
Do you really want a civil war? Do you? Have you thought about what that would actually mean? Likely death of anyone whose disability requires advanced medical care, for one. Quite a lot of other death, most of it of innocent civilians. Lots of rape, murder, looting, because those are things that happen in war zones, and your having a righteous cause will not prevent awful people from participating. And in the end, unless you can get a majority of people to agree your government is legitimate, probably a huge terrorism problem no matter who wins, and you're going to have to be brutally repressive if you want to hang on to power unless you have a majority. Which you won't.
Stop fantasizing about how you think the world should be and work with the world you have.
(Not that any of these people are going to listen, if they see this, because if they were the kind of people who were willing to listen to this speech they wouldn't be calling for civil war in the first place.)
But otherwise we're back to what I've said before: if you don't vote, and they do, all you get is the other side voting and the other side in power. And our system is a lot of checks and balances; Democrats having a marginal majority does not mean they can magically do whatever they want. People saying "Biden should just issue an executive order dissolving the Supreme Court" are... fuzzy... on how the government actually works. Democrats aren't perfect but they're better than the Republicans, and for all the "both sides!" stuff (which is not any better a look on leftists than "neutrals," by the way), Democrats would not have done this, and they wouldn't have permitted it if they'd been in a position to stop it.
It's easier to burn something down than build something up. All the Republicans have to do is cause chaos. They need many fewer seats to do that, and they've been good at not having internecine warfare long enough to get just enough people to cause chaos. Democrats need a lot more of the government to do anything useful, because they need to build things up. I saw someone say that Biden should have packed the court and respond to being asked "how?" with "I DON'T CARE HOW." Which tells me a couple of things-- you're okay with living in a dictatorship as long as it's your dictatorship, and that you have absolutely no idea how government works.
"We're not donating to Democrats until legislation happens" is also another way to ensure legislation never happens, by the by. If they have no money to campaign then the Republicans get elected.
Going on about overthrowing the government is fun (if you're a certain type of person), but your revolution isn't a revolution until it's got a budget, a date, and actionable steps attached to it. Now, I think violent revolution is a bad idea-- there are specific historical reasons the American Revolution resulted in a functioning government that don't apply to most violent revolutions; we really need to teach the actual history of the French Revolution past the storming of the Bastille-- but if you're not going out and planning out exactly how you're going to do it, you're not doing anything useful, and you are doing active harm by promoting fatalism and convincing people there's no point in activism because they're not doing violent revolution. (And most people? Are not down with violent revolution.)
Do you really want a civil war? Do you? Have you thought about what that would actually mean? Likely death of anyone whose disability requires advanced medical care, for one. Quite a lot of other death, most of it of innocent civilians. Lots of rape, murder, looting, because those are things that happen in war zones, and your having a righteous cause will not prevent awful people from participating. And in the end, unless you can get a majority of people to agree your government is legitimate, probably a huge terrorism problem no matter who wins, and you're going to have to be brutally repressive if you want to hang on to power unless you have a majority. Which you won't.
Stop fantasizing about how you think the world should be and work with the world you have.
(Not that any of these people are going to listen, if they see this, because if they were the kind of people who were willing to listen to this speech they wouldn't be calling for civil war in the first place.)
